I've been working on an outline of the evolutionary conditions - mostly restating what JWG lectures on but with some of my own inferences - and was hoping for feedback. I'll just post one stage at a time.

Thanks,Ellen

The Consensus State: Key Phrase: I CONFORMUnderlying Archetype: SaturnThe need and desire to conformDefined by separating desires (this was really eye opening understanding for me)70 % of any collective mass/society is in the Consensus StateHow you know someone is in the Consensus State:The person will agree, without thinking, with whatever the generally agreed upon authorities of the collective say on any given matter.

The 3 Stages of the Consensus State:

Worker Bees: 1st Stage. These are the workers who sustain the society. Their level of self-awareness or consciousness is minimal; their view of and awareness of reality does not go beyond their own immediate, instinctual needs for survival and belonging. They do what they are told. Their behavior is essentially mindless.

The Professional Class: 2nd Stage. These are the people who have (egocentric) desires to succeed beyond the status of the common worker. They are more self-aware than the common worker: they understand the importance of position in society in terms of status and survival. They seek out proper social authorization – education/ training/credentialing - to move beyond worker status to higher levels of social position. They are the CEO’s, the university professors, the self-employed business entrepreneurs. They still believe what they are told. Their motivation is still survival (social/psychological) and the need to belong.

The Political Leaders/ High Profile People in Society: 3rd Stage. It can be summed up as “the (egocentric) blind leading the (egocentric) blind”. They are still part of the system and now know how it works. They are still operating in an egocentric (separating) manner. Survival and belonging are still their primary driving forces (ie, they do not yet feel a sense of alienation from the collective). Their desire is to manipulate the system to their advantage, according to their desire.

So, could the evolutionary necessity of the Consensus State be summed up as survival, and also as the necessary foundation (to compare/contrast with) for the future, evolving self-awareness to come?

Very interesting thread, and I like the way you summarise these EA principles in your own succinct way.One thing I've been interested in clearing up for myself is the 3rd stage Consensus.

It seems to be portrayed as being the stage of the "political" leader. I notice that you have put CEOs in the 2nd stage, but I think they might belong in this 3rd stage along with the political leaders.

What I'm not clear on yet, is that in any given society or grouping of people there are always those who are "natural" leaders. In less civilised societies where "might was right" it was mostly always the superior warrior who became the chief, the emperor etc by physical force. Even today that is still basically the criteria (got more weapons then you got more power, so we have the balance of power determined by whose army, airforce, navy is bigger, and in more sinister terms - who has the biggest nuclear strike power). And sometimes the warrior is not in disguise at all - eg the coup staged by the army leader in Fiji who is now ruling the country, Sadam Hussein etc. But not everyone can be a leader, there have to be a majority that are the folllowers.

It's like a pyramid, with the powerful people in society at the top of the pyramid. So to rise to the top of society is to get to the top of the pyramid, and this is the pathway into the Individuated Stage. But it seems a bit like going through the eye of the needle at the top of the pyramid, as not everyone can be a leader. So, if 20% of a society at any point in time are in the Individuated Stage, and they all had to go through the 3rd stage Consensus, then does this mean they all had to be political/social leaders? It would seem that the leaders of of a society do not amount to 20% of that society at any one point in time, or do they? .... or do souls have to wait for a long time to culminate the 3rd stage Consensus (cos there's not much room up there), and only a few are in that position at any one point in time, and they drip feed into the Individuated Stage, just as a few are drip feeding from the Individuated Stage into the Spiritual Stage (which consists of only 3-4% of a society at any point in time).

Very interesting thread, and I like the way you summarise these EA principles in your own succinct way.One thing I've been interested in clearing up for myself is the 3rd stage Consensus.

It seems to be portrayed as being the stage of the "political" leader. I notice that you have put CEOs in the 2nd stage, but I think they might belong in this 3rd stage along with the political leaders.

What I'm not clear on yet, is that in any given society or grouping of people there are always those who are "natural" leaders. In less civilised societies where "might was right" it was mostly always the superior warrior who became the chief, the emperor etc by physical force. Even today that is still basically the criteria (got more weapons then you got more power, so we have the balance of power determined by whose army, airforce, navy is bigger, and in more sinister terms - who has the biggest nuclear strike power). And sometimes the warrior is not in disguise at all - eg the coup staged by the army leader in Fiji who is now ruling the country, Sadam Hussein etc. But not everyone can be a leader, there have to be a majority that are the folllowers.

It's like a pyramid, with the powerful people in society at the top of the pyramid. So to rise to the top of society is to get to the top of the pyramid, and this is the pathway into the Individuated Stage. But it seems a bit like going through the eye of the needle at the top of the pyramid, as not everyone can be a leader. So, if 20% of a society at any point in time are in the Individuated Stage, and they all had to go through the 3rd stage Consensus, then does this mean they all had to be political/social leaders? It would seem that the leaders of of a society do not amount to 20% of that society at any one point in time, or do they? .... or do souls have to wait for a long time to culminate the 3rd stage Consensus (cos there's not much room up there), and only a few are in that position at any one point in time, and they drip feed into the Individuated Stage, just as a few are drip feeding from the Individuated Stage into the Spiritual Stage (which consists of only 3-4% of a society at any point in time).

Upasika

Hi Upasika,

I have similar questions about this. RE: CEO's. I'm pretty sure I got this correct, ie, what JWG said in his lectures. I remember thinking it seemed odd to me also. However, thinking about it, CEO's aren't what they used to be - heads of mere single-entity corporations. The corporations have morphed into multi-national entities w/ major political power. So perhaps it makes more sense now to put them as 3rd stage...?

RE: the question of whether or not being a political leader is the only way through the gate, perhaps there are levels of this, ie, all the way through the political spectrum, right down to neighborhood associations. I'm guessing here. I don't really know. But it might be one way to make sense of it. Also, the category also includes social icons, I think, so movie stars, the social elite, etc. People strongly in the public eye. So perhaps this widens the gate some. From American culture, for example, would Paris Hilton be considered 3rd stage Consensus? How about Brad Pitt? etc....

BTW, I also had the same question re: 2nd stage spiritual. I know the percentages are small. But it still seems like a lot of spiritually ego-inflated Souls running around at one time. But again, perhaps the answer is that they can manifest in smaller circles...?Peace,Ellen

I have similar questions about this. RE: CEO's. I'm pretty sure I got this correct, ie, what JWG said in his lectures. I remember thinking it seemed odd to me also. However, thinking about it, CEO's aren't what they used to be - heads of mere single-entity corporations. The corporations have morphed into multi-national entities w/ major political power. So perhaps it makes more sense now to put them as 3rd stage...?

In this final subdivision within the consensus state the Soul desires to be ‘on top’ of society; to have positions of social importance and relative power, prestige, and material abundance - the politicians, CEO’s of corporations, important positions in the business world, mainstream religious leaders, and so on. As a result, these Souls constitute the ‘upper strata’ of society.

RE: the question of whether or not being a political leader is the only way through the gate, perhaps there are levels of this, ie, all the way through the political spectrum, right down to neighborhood associations. I'm guessing here. I don't really know. But it might be one way to make sense of it. Also, the category also includes social icons, I think, so movie stars, the social elite, etc. People strongly in the public eye. So perhaps this widens the gate some. From American culture, for example, would Paris Hilton be considered 3rd stage Consensus? How about Brad Pitt? etc....

Well, I have no more idea than you if this is right or not, but if it was it makes some sense e.g. the leader of the local neighbourhood association. But it possibly depends on other motivations/beliefs that person has - how much ambition was involved basically in them holding that post? I could imagine they could be just doing the job because they like the social aspect and no-one else in their little group wanted such a boring mundane responsibility. And they might actually have very little interest of the wider world outside their little community. If that was the case they are probably not "upper strata of society" (i.e. 3rd stage Consensus) candidates... or are they? How big is this gate? As for celebrities and socialites ... yes, where do they fit in? Is their status the only criteria?

BTW, I also had the same question re: 2nd stage spiritual. I know the percentages are small. But it still seems like a lot of spiritually ego-inflated Souls running around at one time. But again, perhaps the answer is that they can manifest in smaller circles...?

The world's population was about 6.8 billion in 2009.70% of this = 4.7 billion (Consensus)20% of this = 1.36 billion (Individuated)5% of this = 340 million (Spiritual)

... so theoretically that's a lot in the Spiritual Stage now ! (Jeffrey says 5% in Pluto II)

And I'm not sure of %s for substages within the Spiritual Stage but if we assumed for arguments sake it was very very loosely in the same proportion as the whole Stages paradigm i.e 85% in the 1st substage, 14% in the 2nd substage & 1% in the 3rd substage (have no idea how accurate that might actually be!) ... then that would represent 47 million in the 2nd substage !! That indeed would be a lot of "spiritual egos" (as you put it) wandering around the planet at any one time. The same proportions would imply there were 3.4 million fully enlightened souls of the calibre of Buddha etc alive on the planet today. My feeling is that if this were the case, humanity wouldn't be in such dire straights as it is at this point in time, as I understand things anyway. So, I'm not sure about these figures and whether there are actually so many in the 2nd substage of the Spiritual Stage. Again, needs more input.

Here's a confusion I have. These days there are SO MANY spiritual teachers/egos talking about the evolution of consciousness on this planet. Some key words I often come across are:Light bodiesDNA activation5th domainAscensionPlanetary ascension

The way I hear these teachers talk about it- it seems like they believe or see the potential for many souls to reach what ea would call third stage spiritual- in just less than a few years from now.

It can take more than hundreds of life times for a soul to evolve from one substate to the next. At the same time, there is clearly something unique happening at this moment in history.

What is a misunderstanding of what is ACTUALLY going on, and what is true? Is it indeed possible for so many souls to experience a rapid exceleration of evolution during this time- which otherwise would normally take hundreds or thousands of lifetimes?

Is it indeed possible for so many souls to experience a rapid exceleration of evolution during this time- which otherwise would normally take hundreds or thousands of lifetimes?

No - natural law is not going to be suspended for the brilliance of a few million or billion human beings.

Quote

What is a misunderstanding of what is ACTUALLY going on, and what is true?

What you have is boat loads of deluded egos who believe that due to their/our inherent specialness they or we are going to be able to violate all the laws of nature and have mass enlightenment with no money down by next week.

I have told many people the following: "If mass enlightenment occurred next month, the first thing that would happen is all the mental hospitals would be filled overnight".

How hard have you worked for and desired the spiritual growth you have achieved in this life? How easy has it been to attain? You WANTED it, and it was difficult. Now these people run around teaching that every Tom Jenny and Billy on the street, who have spent their whole life resisting every possible expansion of growth, are miraculously going to wake up one morning in full memory of who they are, to live in eternal bliss.

The first thing that happens when the lights go on is you see more of all your past crap. The typical response is deep guilt and remorse. And this is in those of us who actually SEEK such experiences.

So you are telling me that people who have never wanted any of this are going to wake up one morning and understand all this, integrate all their past crap, totally accept themselves and live in peace and total harmony, all over night. Centuries of past ingrained emotional patterns of greed selfishness fear control etc are going to miraculously dissolve and be replaced with eternal love and harmony, in a few months or years.

What is the capacity of a human organism to integrate radical change? That is why I say if this instant enlightenment occurred, the mental hospitals would be full.

Half this planet is starving but people are concerned about their own personal DNA getting activated in light bodies so they can get the hell out of here and leave the ignorant hungry to fend for themselves. Sounds very spiritual to me.

This is delusion, calling itself higher consciousness. The end result of all this greed callousness indifference and delusions of spiritual superiority is going to be very ugly for the human race and all other species on this planet.

In the end the real change on this planet is going to come, as JWG said for years, through circumstantial necessity, when anything other than people changing and banding together for survival collapses and completely stops working. Its not going to be pretty. Then you might start seeing some rapid growth, in the face of very difficult physical conditions.

To me you are approaching evolutionary stages from an overly linear perspective. It is not mathematical.

Everything in life proceeds from DESIRE. Its basically a matter of yearning for or believing in something that seems to be what I want. I then go out and work to bring it into form, and eventually experience it.

Over eons of time I gradually discover what I thought I wanted does not create the feelings I thought it would. This brings on crises in loss of meaning and disillusionment. Then questions start arising within "There has to be more than this", which leads to soul searching, which eventually leads to daring to try something new.

The EA term is "exhaustion of separating desires". There are myriads of separating desires, thus it takes a long time.

Simple example - the majority of kids would probably feel its better to receive than to give. What do you have to go through before you reach an inner place where you know, you feel deeply, its better to give than to receive? How long does it take your Soul to realize that? Third stage consensus, in patriarchal reality, is for the most part about taking. What kind and how many disillusioning experiences must one have before they are willing to give up playing a big illusive part in running the show? Very often it takes a massive personal crisis or downfall, that creates context against which the shallowness and selfishness of the life that has been created is revealed. And even when that is finally seen, at that point the person knows no other way to live. That 3rd stage consensus life is all they know. To start all over at ground zero after having been in the illusive heights is not a small thing. They are literally starting at ground zero, releasing all that has been, or else life releases it for them against their will, and they are forced to move on. Imagine how much resistance they are feeling within.

Pluto represents resistance, and we all have resistance to necessary changes. Changes from stage to stage ultimately occur because of shifts in the Soul's desire nature. And what sort of experiences bring about those shifts? How do they feel on the human level? How easy is it to change those ingrained patterns, habits, ways of perceiving reality? It takes a long time and a lot of discouraging events, to move forward on the evolutionary journey. Out of all of that is born compassion, tender understanding of how difficult all this is, which is a signature quality of the highly evolved. They know from personal experience how hard this is. Out of love and caring they come around and help us understand, slowly, by example, by encouraging us when we are discouraged.

As we learn these deeper lessons, we are slowly yet inevitably progressing on that scale of evolutionary Soul stages. The advancement is all based on desire and personal effort.

Thanks very much for your input. What you have said about the evolutionary process, especially as it relates to 3rd stage Consensus is interesting and helpful, particularly the "taking" versus "giving", and it being a key hallmark of how separating desires manifest in the Consensus Stage.

Because of the approximate proportions of the population in the different stages that EA gives, I was playfully seeing how this looked in numbers of people as much as anything else, and I don't attach much to it. I understand that it's the desires in a person's Soul that drive that soul's evolution, and that exhausting those desires is a long and winding road, certainly not a linear or mathmatical process.

What I'm much more interested in is getting a clearer understanding of the reality and subtlety of the stages and substages, in particular whether people can be in 3rd stage Consensus without being a CEO of an international organisation or political leader of a country. While people in these roles are clearly in 3rd stage Consensus, is it really simply a matter of role in society?

And what I think I understand you are saying is that it isn't necessarily so. That it has more to do with a person's inner orientation to reality, rather than the specific role they have in society. So what I'm understanding from this is that someone could pass through the 3rd stage Consensus without necessarily having a high profile role in consensus society in any life as such (although many do have), rather it is more about their responses to everyday reality and life, their illusory ambitions and selfishness leading eventually to a fundamental existential crisis and the inevitable release of it all, which can play out within a person on an inner level over many lifetimes regardless of the roles in society the person has in the process. Would this be correct?

So what I'm understanding from this is that someone could pass through the 3rd stage Consensus without necessarily having a high profile role in consensus society in any life as such (although many do have),

Hi

These are just some thoughts on this. Don't take this as an authoritative answer.

Relative to desire natures, a person in 3rd stage consensus is going to be focused on attaining positions of power and authority within which they can be seen as special. What Jeffrey called the Zarathustra class. The gist of it being "I am among the elite, the ones who are beyond the rules, who make the rules for everyone, those rules not applying to them.

The natural archetype here would be to rule in service to the whole - to wield power wisely. The distorted inverted version, most common today, is "I am special, all these peons can just serve me. I am the world shaker and mover."

Within this today you can find not only CEO's but political leaders on all levels - how about Senator Bunning holding up signing unemployment benefit renewal just because he felt like it, saying "Tough shit" when informed how much pain this would be causing to millions. Movie stars and producers, sports stars, even music stars. How about media "stars" who are household names and who lie for a living, every day broadcasting propaganda they know is untrue to keep millions buying into the very systems that are screwing them.

The archetype would be, I have learned how the world system works, how to manipulate it for the personal benefit of myself and my friends and people I care about. I am going to be one of those in that class. Some may not even like that the world is constructed this way, but this is just the way it is, and I'm going to participate and get mine for me. In 3rd stage consensus they aspire to do this on a large scale. Nowadays corruption is everywhere, so buying into that mindset includes accepting corruption. They decide not to care. They accept it as part of the cost of fulfilling those desires for personal specialness.

There are many forms in which that archetype could play out. You recognize it not so much by the outer position but by the inner psychology. 3rd stage consensus exists everywhere, including impoverished nations - look at some of the "leaders" in Africa. They won't be billionaires or household names in the USA. They are people willing to do whatever it takes to rise to the top of the pile, to see themselves as different special and beyond the rules that apply to everyone else. They don't care enough about the cost of this on others to restrain themselves. Not all of them are evil or doing terrible things. They are just willing to live with consequences in exchange for personal glorification and power.

Another example - politicians who will totally change their position on anything as the wind blows. One year I am against gay marriage. Next year gay marriage starts being seen as acceptable. Suddenly I am for gay marriage, and I was really truly always for it, just didn't come right out and say it. The point is, no principles at all except self-advancement. Whatever I need to say or do to get ahead, I'm there.

That is a great way to explain it more clearly - in one way it was nothing new to me at all, it immediately touched a chord deep in my bones as I've always known that this is the Consensus reality, the way they think and operate, and is so transparently obvious in many politicians for starters.

But in another way, the examples you've used regarding 3rd stage Consensus have put it so simply and concisely that it's really honed my appeciation of the subtleness of it, and how to recognise it more clearly. As you say, the events regarding Bunning are an unbelievable yet classic example of it, but I can see now how it relates to anyone with a certain mindset and lack of understanding of their desires and natural law - it's to do with the underlying attitude, regardless of their status in society or how visible they are in it. Which is as I suspected.

What you've said correlates not only to my own inner feeling, but also to observable reality in the world today, so to me it has a natural authority and I'm very appreciative of it. That's really cleared it up for me so thanks very much for your help Steve.

In this final subdivision within the consensus state the Soul desires to be ‘on top’ of society; to have positions of social importance and relative power, prestige, and material abundance - the politicians, CEO’s of corporations, important positions in the business world, mainstream religious leaders, and so on. As a result, these Souls constitute the ‘upper strata’ of society.

.... so that probably confirms that they belong in 3rd substage.

Well that's it, then! Always feels so good to have the confusion cleared!

But it possibly depends on other motivations/beliefs that person has - how much ambition was involved basically in them holding that post? I could imagine they could be just doing the job because they like the social aspect and no-one else in their little group wanted such a boring mundane responsibility. And they might actually have very little interest of the wider world outside their little community. If that was the case they are probably not "upper strata of society" (i.e. 3rd stage Consensus) candidates... or are they? How big is this gate? As for celebrities and socialites ... yes, where do they fit in? Is their status the only criteria?

Guess we need more input from others on this.

Yes, I agree. We probably need more input. But your thought re: the motivation behind holding such a post makes intuitive sense to me. I haven't read through Steve's posts below - perhaps he clears it up...

The natural archetype here would be to rule in service to the whole - to wield power wisely. The distorted inverted version, most common today, is "I am special, all these peons can just serve me. I am the world shaker and mover."

Hi Steve,

Thanks so much for your responses. The distinction between natural and distorted helps clear things up. In the practice charts thread, I am trying to clear up confusions I'm having re: the individuated stages and this distinction I think is the key.

Examples of distorted 3rd stage do seem everywhere and the world does feel to be a minefield of corruption. I am wondering if someone like Oprah would be an example of 3rd stage Consensus (or is she considered to be in the spiritual state), yet considered as an example of the natural expression of the archetype. And if she is not 3rd stage consensus and/or not considered an example of the natural expression of it, could you possibly offer an example of someone who is... It would help as I am still not sure how to understand what I am observing and how to correlate that to the different states and substages.

Examples of distorted 3rd stage do seem everywhere and the world does feel to be a minefield of corruption. I am wondering if someone like Oprah would be an example of 3rd stage Consensus (or is she considered to be in the spiritual state), yet considered as an example of the natural expression of the archetype. And if she is not 3rd stage consensus and/or not considered an example of the natural expression of it, could you possibly offer an example of someone who is... It would help as I am still not sure how to understand what I am observing and how to correlate that to the different states and substages.

Hi Ellen

I doubt you are going to find many (or any) examples of natural 3rd stage consensus in today's world. I was referring to thousands of years ago, when consensus was more aligned with natural.

I don't know enough about Oprah to know her evolutionary stage. I would guess individuated - she is trying to move society forward into unknowns. Consensus would not be doing that.

The trick of learning the stages is to grasp the underlying psychological archetypes associated with a stage. Then you can begin to recognize that archetype playing out in various forms.

1st stage Indiv - are different, yet afraid to be different - pretend to be normal, are not.2nd stage Indiv - look very different, have deep anger about the way things are. underneath, fear being pulled back into consensus.3rd stage indiv - individuality fully formed - no way they can be pulled back to consensus. they seek to reform improve transform the world for the better1st stage spiritual - feel very small, desire to serve, spirituality is of a devotional nature

I don't know enough about Oprah to know her evolutionary stage. I would guess individuated - she is trying to move society forward into unknowns. Consensus would not be doing that.

Hi Steve,

Thank you so much! This clears up the confusion I was having in the Practice Charts threads re: how to make sense of the Columbine shootings and the linkage I had in my mind between the alienation of the individuated state with destructive rebellion. What a relief! I just couldn't figure out how to equate alienation with constructive action. But it's all around really - all the rights movements of our society.

I will go ahead and post my much more lengthy outline of the individuated states just to be sure I've got it right and hopefully stimulate some more discussion.